Jump to content


Photo

Lighting for HVX 200 with RedRock


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 neil orchard

neil orchard

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 27 August 2009 - 11:32 AM

Im shooting a short thats most interior with the Hvx with a Redrock. Lighting tests wernt that great we had to use a lot of light and didnt like the overall look. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to achieve some good looking images using the redrock without using all the lights we have
  • 0

#2 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 27 August 2009 - 11:54 AM

HVX is a "slower" camera and lens adapters reduce light. The best of them take away about 1/2 a stop and the worst can be 2 stops of light or more. The simple answer is that in order to use them, and be anywhere aside from wide open, you're going to need to light and on occasion light a lot.
  • 0

#3 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 27 August 2009 - 01:18 PM

HVX is a "slower" camera and lens adapters reduce light. The best of them take away about 1/2 a stop and the worst can be 2 stops of light or more. The simple answer is that in order to use them, and be anywhere aside from wide open, you're going to need to light and on occasion light a lot.


What didn't you like about the look? Is the camera (the whole system, camera, adapter, lenses) set up properly?
  • 0

#4 Jason Outenreath

Jason Outenreath
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 112 posts
  • Director
  • Austin, Texas

Posted 30 August 2009 - 03:37 PM

Also, if I remember correctly, the RedRock adapter is the cheapest adapter on the market, and requires significantly more light than many of the other systems (i.e. ps technic).
  • 0

#5 Chad Stockfleth

Chad Stockfleth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 622 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Louisville, KY

Posted 31 August 2009 - 10:43 AM

What primes are you using? If you're shooting with something that has a minimum f-stop of 3.5 or something you aren't doing yourself any favors.

HVX is a noisy camera to begin with. Going through all that extra glass can't help. Why not lose the adapter and shoot with the kit lens?
  • 0

#6 steve laramie

steve laramie
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Philadelphia

Posted 31 August 2009 - 11:42 AM

I DPed 8 films with the HVX200a and redrock M2. It is a nightmare. I always demand a truck load of lights and fast lenses for every shoot. I recently shot a feature on a RED and was amazed to see I COULD light a scene with just practicals.

FYI this should be in the cinematography section not cinematographers tisk tisk.

Edited by steve laramie, 31 August 2009 - 11:44 AM.

  • 0

#7 Álvaro Gutiérrez

Álvaro Gutiérrez

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Spain

Posted 16 September 2009 - 05:45 AM

This set up (HVX + M2) was also a nightmare for me... I'd lose the adapter, I don't think the shallow depth is worth the compromise on the use of heavy light units.
  • 0

#8 DJ Kast

DJ Kast
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Green Bay, WI

Posted 19 September 2009 - 01:40 PM

Also, if I remember correctly, the RedRock adapter is the cheapest adapter on the market, and requires significantly more light than many of the other systems (i.e. ps technic).


I work most extensively with the HVX 200 with the P+S Technic, and I've rated it at 160 ISO. It's about two stops faster without the adapter, so I think no matter where you go adapterwise, you'll need a significant amount of light. The HVX 200A is a faster camera, so maybe thats an option.
  • 0

#9 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 19 September 2009 - 02:24 PM

I work most extensively with the HVX 200 with the P+S Technic, and I've rated it at 160 ISO. It's about two stops faster without the adapter, so I think no matter where you go adapterwise, you'll need a significant amount of light. The HVX 200A is a faster camera, so maybe thats an option.


Or even the HPX170 if you are recording to P2 and not tape.
They both are faster cameras and have a bit more resolution too.

Probably the easiest thing is to lose the adaptor tho! :)

love

Freya
  • 0

#10 David Bradley

David Bradley
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 159 posts
  • Other
  • London UK

Posted 19 September 2009 - 05:36 PM

Im shooting a short thats most interior with the Hvx with a Redrock. Lighting tests wernt that great we had to use a lot of light and didnt like the overall look. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to achieve some good looking images using the redrock without using all the lights we have


If you don't mind the noise you could bump up the gain, reducing the detail level might soften some of the harshest fuzz. Unfortunately it is a slow system so it will require more light. What was the problem anyway, did you not like the look of the image produced by the camera or are you having difficulty lighting the scene?
  • 0

#11 Corey Steib

Corey Steib
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Orlando, FL

Posted 24 September 2009 - 07:43 PM

Also about using the Red Rock or Letus etc... with the HVX is that you lose the great color that the Panasonic Camera Captures as well. So I would use the kit lens and do some color correcting either inside the camera or in post. I have the HPX300 and the color 4:2:2 ratio is amazing.
  • 0

#12 Ravi Kiran

Ravi Kiran
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 139 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 26 September 2009 - 07:47 PM

I stepped in for the DP on a film shot with an HVX-200, a Brevis, and still lenses, which was not fun. The lenses weren't very good, plus having to go through all that glass meant that we were blasting the scenes with light. Some of the stuff I shot was underexposed, and if I could go back and redo those shots today I'd throw more light on them.

Edited by Ravi Kiran, 26 September 2009 - 07:50 PM.

  • 0

#13 Jonathan Dube

Jonathan Dube
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Grip
  • Quebec,Canada

Posted 21 October 2009 - 12:25 PM

The first generation of M2 RedRock keeps 2 stop and a half but, the new version, the upgrade kit, stops only ½ stop wich is an important amount of light. Considering that you can't offer you something bigger like high-end cameras, the dof of the redrock is such an advantage, even with the loss of light.
  • 0

#14 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 21 October 2009 - 12:32 PM

The first generation of M2 RedRock keeps 2 stop and a half but, the new version, the upgrade kit, stops only ½ stop wich is an important amount of light. Considering that you can't offer you something bigger like high-end cameras, the dof of the redrock is such an advantage, even with the loss of light.



To be homest I would rather shoot with a 7D.
  • 0


CineLab

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

CineTape

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Tai Audio

Opal

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Opal

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

CineTape

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS